Re: Another Surgery for Roger Ebert
Quote:
| Not to sound crude or insensitive, but...........6 months tops. |
You're a class act, Will.
And an astounding diagnostician, I might add.
Jon
| Not to sound crude or insensitive, but...........6 months tops. |
| You're a class act, Will. And an astounding diagnostician, I might add. Jon |
Ken
"No one would know us there."
-Far From Heaven- (2002)
|
Originally Posted by Adam Lenhardt
If you go to his website, he's posted two other reviews in addition to Shrek 3 as well. Looks like he's slowly but surely starting to ramp things back up again.
|
| P.S. I posted this story in this thread because I couldn't find the thread for The Departed when I did a search. |
|
Originally Posted by Ocean Phoenix
Roger Ebert posted a review of The Departed this week because he was still recovering from surgery when it was released:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...VIEWS/70705002 I'm really glad he did, because this movie and Casino Royale were the two I was most disappointed he could not review last year. I'm still curious about what his thoughts on Casino Royale are, but at least his thoughts on The Departed are no longer a mystery. P.S. I posted this story in this thread because I couldn't find the thread for The Departed when I did a search. |


|
Originally Posted by Holadem
Good review, the complete absence of any reference to Whalberg or his character is puzzling.
-- H |
| While Wahlberg did give a great performance, he really wasn't as powerful of a presence in the movie as the three main characters. |
|
Originally Posted by Ocean Phoenix
Ebert is a big fan and close friend of Scorsese. As a result, he has a tendency to get carried away praising and analyzing Scorsese's career and philosophies when he reviews the guy's work since he is so intruigued by the man and his movies. Doing that took up space in the review that could have been otherwise spent discussing characters like Wahlberg's. I don't think the lack of attention to that character is much of an oversight, though. While Wahlberg did give a great performance, he really wasn't as powerful of a presence in the movie as the three main characters. He seemed to be out of the movie for long stretches before reappearing at the end. I enjoyed his performance, but I was surprised by his nomination. After all, I don't remember him doing much besides making sarcastic or condescending remarks and getting into shouting matchs throughout the movie.
![]() |
| In that sense, the most honest and sincere characters in the movie are Queenan (Sheen), Costello (Nicholson), and Costello's right-hand man, French (Ray Winstone, that superb British actor who invests every line with the authority of God dictating to Moses). |
| There is another character who is caught in a moral vise, and may sense it although she cannot for a long time know it. That is Madolyn (Vera Farmiga), a psychologist who works for the police, and who coincidentally comes to know both Colin and Billy. Her loyalty is not to her employer but to her client -- and oh, what a tangled web that becomes. |
| It is reasonable to assume that Boston working-class men named Costigan, Sullivan, Costello, Dignam and Queenan were brought up as Irish-American Catholics, [...] |

|
Originally Posted by Shawn.F
I would love to read what he thought about Casino Royale (if he has seen it, that is). Perhaps you could email Ebert at the newspaper and just ask him? He might just give you a quick summary, but at least we would have an idea of his thoughts.
![]() It's very good to see him back reviewing. |
|
Originally Posted by Thi Them
Anyone else finding the show to be a lot more entertaining with Roeper and the bald guy with the goatee?
|